With the iPad out there seems like there is a lot of Flash bashing going on. Part of the development community is dusting off their old arguments against using Flash and touting HTML5 as the up and coming golden era in Web development. I am not praying to the HTML5 gods to wish away Flash just yet.
As a material, I have though of Flash like clay. I can model it into any shape I want. It's receptive to my ideas. For me, I simply have not found anything that allows for this level of creativity. I know in the hands of the inexperienced, Flash can look like a high school art project. But, in the hands of the experienced, a well crafted experience that gets noticed. And that could be said of any technology.
HTML/CSS is more like Legos. It has predefined pieces that snap together in a predefined manner. Often development is tempered with the logistics of execution. Jquery and similar things have made strides to make open standards tools that are more like Flash, but they lack the same capabilities and a sophisticated environment that is instrumental to the creative process.
All products have a life cycle. With so many things that come and go, it's real easy to start predicting the end of the world for just about anything. Flash has evolved from a simple animation tool to a complex RIA ecosystem. Flash seem to be riding the wave of change just fine. I expect it will be around for some time.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Thursday, February 25, 2010
B2B - We do training not usability
“We do training so we don’t need to focus on usability,” ever hear that one? All I can say to that is, thank god you don’t make anything I have to use. Imagine if DVD players were built like that. Picture it on the shelf now. 100 buttons, half of them labeled, the other half aren’t. Next to it is a big sign, free 6 hour training webinar with purchase. Hey, can’t beat free training right? Of course next to it is a well designed DVD player with an implicitly understood user interface. It looks simple to use. And it should be, I want to watch a movie not problem solve for half the time it would take to watch said movie. Which one are you going to purchase?
Let just pretend I purchase this nightmare DVD player. First off, I can’t just use the DVD player because I have to schedule a time that my entire family is available for 6 hours. Also, my wife and I have to schedule time off from doing things that make money to sit through what I am sure will be a riveting training session. After the training, no one will completely get it because of the complexity, so we all will have to also play with it for a couple more days before it starts to make sense. Now it’s hard to use, but we get it after a good month or two. But now, every time we want to watch a movie it takes around 25 steps to get it started. And since nothing is well labeled, we are also prone to making multiple mistakes. Often it’s so irritating that we often abandon the process and do something else. Now we resent the DVD player and typically only use it as a last resort. Using it just makes us angry.
Inefficiencies, wasted time, abandonment, and let’s not forget the negative branding experience are all very real problems that pursuing training over usability causes. If you look at the numbers you can really see your usability ROI at work. Say on a piece of software it takes 200 hours to design the application with usability best practices. First, the applied usability removes the need for training, (150 employees) x (6 hours) = (900 hours) of company time saved. But wait, there’s more. We also have optimized the application so that it takes 5 minutes less time per session, (150 employees) x (5 minutes) x (using the application 3 times a week) x (using the application for a modest 4 years) = (2400 hours) more time saved. That totals 3300 hours of saved time for a 200 hour investment. I am not even going to mention the time saved on support.
Usability in the B2B world should be expected, but all too many times training is the answer. For the companies that seriously focus on usability it can become a strong unique selling proposition. Like with our DVD players, in a side to side comparison, usability driven products will outshine anything that was created “broken” with the crutch of training to bridge the gap.
Let just pretend I purchase this nightmare DVD player. First off, I can’t just use the DVD player because I have to schedule a time that my entire family is available for 6 hours. Also, my wife and I have to schedule time off from doing things that make money to sit through what I am sure will be a riveting training session. After the training, no one will completely get it because of the complexity, so we all will have to also play with it for a couple more days before it starts to make sense. Now it’s hard to use, but we get it after a good month or two. But now, every time we want to watch a movie it takes around 25 steps to get it started. And since nothing is well labeled, we are also prone to making multiple mistakes. Often it’s so irritating that we often abandon the process and do something else. Now we resent the DVD player and typically only use it as a last resort. Using it just makes us angry.
Inefficiencies, wasted time, abandonment, and let’s not forget the negative branding experience are all very real problems that pursuing training over usability causes. If you look at the numbers you can really see your usability ROI at work. Say on a piece of software it takes 200 hours to design the application with usability best practices. First, the applied usability removes the need for training, (150 employees) x (6 hours) = (900 hours) of company time saved. But wait, there’s more. We also have optimized the application so that it takes 5 minutes less time per session, (150 employees) x (5 minutes) x (using the application 3 times a week) x (using the application for a modest 4 years) = (2400 hours) more time saved. That totals 3300 hours of saved time for a 200 hour investment. I am not even going to mention the time saved on support.
Usability in the B2B world should be expected, but all too many times training is the answer. For the companies that seriously focus on usability it can become a strong unique selling proposition. Like with our DVD players, in a side to side comparison, usability driven products will outshine anything that was created “broken” with the crutch of training to bridge the gap.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Satisficing the Client
We know that when people make a decision, they don’t normally weigh all options, gather all relevant information, or consider the big picture - Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. They simply go with the first thing that makes sense, and do a quick logistics test in their head to see if there are any major gaps in the plan. It’s called satisficing. This is a well understood idea for any usability professional thanks to the book, Don’t Make Me Think. And we apply this concept well to the online experiences we craft.
However, it occurred to me in a client meeting not to long ago that this is also the way group decisions tend to be made, which is unfortunate. You’ve seen it too; someone throws out an idea and someone else may comment on if it’s good or bad. If there are no objections someone on the account side calls it out as the solution and everyone stops thinking about the problem. Is that a solution, yes. Is it the best solution, not likely.
When I draw on my experiences for visual problem solving (design work), I can recall thinking to myself okay, I have two solutions, but what else can throw down there, what are my other options, how else can I see the problem. That’s a normal process for any creative. Once we generate a healthy selection of ideas, we sit back and evaluate them against relevant information and the big picture. Sometimes we have the solution, sometimes we need to think about it more.
That level of problem solving and critical evaluation may be a lot to expect from a meeting, especially when you are expected to think on your feet and be decisive. It’s also difficult to get non-creatives to keep poking at something they think is fine. I am not advocating we turn every meeting into a creative brainstorm, but it’s a quality issue, and just a little of that creative spark can go a long way to improving the direction.
For me, the first step to getting more ideas out there is to realize satisficing is happening. Before you see a closure of the problem solving process, simply asking the question out loud, “is this the best option,” can get things going again. Having just two options are better than one. Jumping out the window to get outside is one option, but I would like to be able to use the door too.
Adjournment is another way to handle it if you have the time and an open minded client. Letting them know you will explore other ideas in addition to the one they’ve developed is the key. I rarely have had push back on that, but you have to watch out they aren’t in love with the first idea. When you are ready to show options again, objectivity is the stage you need to set. Remind them of their goals then present.
Overall, I think it’s an easy situation to remedy. If you intend to stop the presses in the interest in quality, most people are game, but you do have to step up and effect the typical process.
However, it occurred to me in a client meeting not to long ago that this is also the way group decisions tend to be made, which is unfortunate. You’ve seen it too; someone throws out an idea and someone else may comment on if it’s good or bad. If there are no objections someone on the account side calls it out as the solution and everyone stops thinking about the problem. Is that a solution, yes. Is it the best solution, not likely.
When I draw on my experiences for visual problem solving (design work), I can recall thinking to myself okay, I have two solutions, but what else can throw down there, what are my other options, how else can I see the problem. That’s a normal process for any creative. Once we generate a healthy selection of ideas, we sit back and evaluate them against relevant information and the big picture. Sometimes we have the solution, sometimes we need to think about it more.
That level of problem solving and critical evaluation may be a lot to expect from a meeting, especially when you are expected to think on your feet and be decisive. It’s also difficult to get non-creatives to keep poking at something they think is fine. I am not advocating we turn every meeting into a creative brainstorm, but it’s a quality issue, and just a little of that creative spark can go a long way to improving the direction.
For me, the first step to getting more ideas out there is to realize satisficing is happening. Before you see a closure of the problem solving process, simply asking the question out loud, “is this the best option,” can get things going again. Having just two options are better than one. Jumping out the window to get outside is one option, but I would like to be able to use the door too.
Adjournment is another way to handle it if you have the time and an open minded client. Letting them know you will explore other ideas in addition to the one they’ve developed is the key. I rarely have had push back on that, but you have to watch out they aren’t in love with the first idea. When you are ready to show options again, objectivity is the stage you need to set. Remind them of their goals then present.
Overall, I think it’s an easy situation to remedy. If you intend to stop the presses in the interest in quality, most people are game, but you do have to step up and effect the typical process.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)